You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

There have been talks that a prominent superhero will come out gay in new issues of said hero's comic books. It has been made public that the homosexual superhero is none other than the Green Lantern. The article is below.

I think it's really stupid, because its absolutely nothing more than a forced method of shoving a social agenda down people's throats. I'm all for gay people doing their thang, but leave your opinions on sexuality out of my comic book especially when its obviously contrived for purposes outside of the focus of comic book entertainment. The green lantern was married with children for crying out loud. Oh yeah, I don't even read comic books.

I agree, this is an absurd attempt at political correctness

ENFP: We put the Fi in Fire
ENFP
5w4>1w9>2w1 Sx/Sp
SEE-Fi
Papa Bear
Motivation: Dark Worker
Alignment: Chaotic Neutral
Chibi Seme
MTG Color: black/red
Male Archtype: King/LoverSunburst! "You are a gay version of Gambit" Speed Gavroche"I wish that I could be affected by any hate, but I can't, cuz I just get affected by the bank" Chamillionaire

The thing is that a very small population identifies as homosexual, even a smaller population, in the land of fiction, would be endowed with super hero capabilities. The chance of there being a gay super hero is slim to none using basic, logical reasoning. :P

Do you see any approbation in having a black superhero, or maybe a deaf or blind one? Did Xavier's wheelchair ever really bother you, because the chance of a superhero being paraplegic was "slim to none using basic, logical reasoning"? Chances are it didn't, unless maybe you're disgusted by paraplegics too.

And the thing about 'just make a new one'- would you be opposed to an established character 'coming out' if he didn't have a wife and family already? The benefit in choosing an established superhero is that there's already an emotional investment for a lot of people in an established character. Some people will get angry, but others will be forced to look at "why do I have such a problem with this anyway?" in a way that they wouldn't normally consider if there were no already existing emotional investment.

Some people will get angry, but others will be forced to look at "why do I have such a problem with this anyway?" in a way that they wouldn't normally consider if there were no already existing emotional investment.

Yes, so you'd be okay if the gay superheroes were shuffled off into the corner with the other shit that no one reads. You don't like the visibility. Why? Because you don't like the "gay agenda." Why? Because you're anti-gay.

Why couldn't they make a new, gay super hero? I'd be fine with that. Why twist a historic comic book hero's story away from a wife and kids to gay if it wasn't simply to shock an agenda into the mix? How is it homophobic or anti-gay to feel that way? It's not the message, it's the method and the platform being used! I guess I'm combating the PC police.

Out of curiosity, can you explain to me why it's so much worse to have one of the old, high-profile superheroes come out of the closet? How does that fundamentally damage their character, and is that really any more "social engineering" than creating a new, gay superhero?

I think that this is stupid too. It's not the fact that they made him gay stupid, it's that they basically totally rewrote who he is from the ground up in a way, since he had a wife and kids. Then they decide to change it to where he's gay, and none of that existed? That's basically making the older comics irrelevant to the fans, I understand why they're angry.

While I understand DC's motives in wanting others to be more accepting of gay people and to "get with the times" (as they put it), they could have done it with any other hero, especially one without a wife and kids, and especially without totally redoing the story. Also this eliminates a character entirely, his son who is also a superhero (and happens to be gay). I mean... what about the other Green Lantern, the black one? Couldn't they have made him gay? That green lantern's wife was murdered, maybe they could have made him go Bi and get attracted to another male Green Lantern? You shouldn't just totally rehash something like that IMO, but adding onto it like that would have made much more sense.

Someone thinking that this TOTAL plot change is stupid doesn't make them homophobic. What if, say, they totally redid Harry Potter to where he never met Ron, or something? People would be mad. It's along the same thing. It doesn't matter if the character happens to be gay or not, it's still along the same principal.

I think that this is stupid too. It's not the fact that they made him gay stupid, it's that they basically totally rewrote who he is from the ground up in a way, since he had a wife and kids. Then they decide to change it to where he's gay, and none of that existed? That's basically making the older comics irrelevant to the fans, I understand why they're angry.

While I understand DC's motives in wanting others to be more accepting of gay people and to "get with the times" (as they put it), they could have done it with any other hero, especially one without a wife and kids, and especially without totally redoing the story. Also this eliminates a character entirely, his son who is also a superhero (and happens to be gay). I mean... what about the other Green Lantern, the black one? Couldn't they have made him gay? That green lantern's wife was murdered, maybe they could have made him go Bi and get attracted to another male Green Lantern? You shouldn't just totally rehash something like that IMO, but adding onto it like that would have made much more sense.

Someone thinking that this TOTAL plot change is stupid doesn't make them homophobic. What if, say, they totally redid Harry Potter to where he never met Ron, or something? People would be mad. It's along the same thing. It doesn't matter if the character happens to be gay or not, it's still along the same principal.

Then that's being angry for "it's not canon" reasons, which is separate from "gay social agenda being imposed on me" anger. The OP is the latter, since he doesn't read comics and has no investment in the story.

Besides, fucking comic series take all kinds of liberties with characters and storylines. There have already been a shitload since the original Green Lantern. Who gives a shit? I don't understand rigid people (not that you are, BC...I'm just saying in general.)

Out of curiosity, can you explain to me why it's so much worse to have one of the old, high-profile superheroes come out of the closet? How does that fundamentally damage their character, and is that really any more "social engineering" than creating a new, gay superhero?

In my eyes, it doesn't damage character but in general I'm not a fan of a person's moral convictions being trampled on. While I personally don't have a problem with homosexuality, I know that for many people, in many cultures, they do. If those people aren't infringing on another person's rights, then I believe they are entitled to their moral conviction and for an alternative perspective to be jammed down their throat in the likes of a hero whom many have an emotional investment in, and given no option but to accept it or be looked at as a hateful, homophobe, that is wrong.

In my eyes, it doesn't damage character but in general I'm not a fan of a person's moral convictions being trampled on. While I personally don't have a problem with homosexuality, I know that for many people, in many cultures, they do. If those people aren't infringing on another person's rights, then I believe they are entitled to their moral conviction and for an alternative perspective to be jammed down their throat and given no option but to accept it or be looked at as a hateful, homophobe, that is wrong.